Connect with us


Proud American Cooler Company Just Dropped A MOAB On YETI For Ending Ties With NRA – 2A For The Win!

Well Played!



It seems like yet another American Brand has decided that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution has become obsolete.

On April 21 reports started circulating that Yeti Coolers had abruptly cut ties with the NRA Foundation without as much as an explanation or any prior notice, and by April 22 a #BoycottYeti campaign was already sweeping the internet and social media.

The NRA past president and USF executive director Marion Hammer confirmed last week that without warning or prior notice Yeti had declined to do business with the NRA Foundation. All they said was they no longer wished to be an NRA vendor but refused to say why, only that they will no longer sell products to The NRA Foundation.

NRA Statement:

Trending: Elected Democrat Official Who Viciously Attacked Veteran Just Learned Her Fate

“Suddenly, without prior notice, YETI has declined to do business with The NRA Foundation saying they no longer wish to be an NRA vendor, and refused to say why. They will only say they will no longer sell products to The NRA Foundation. That certainly isn’t sportsmanlike. In fact, YETI should be ashamed. They have declined to continue helping America’s young people enjoy outdoor recreational activities. These activities enable them to appreciate America and enjoy our natural resources with wholesome and healthy outdoor recreational and educational programs.”

Hammer also pointed out that the NRA Foundation is a charity organization which raises money “to support youth programs and educational programs nationwide” and says Yeti “should be ashamed.”

But as we have learned before whenever there is a company in America who makes an asinine move like this, there is always one, or several waiting to take its place and do the right thing.

Although YETI had cut ties with customers, who happened to also own gun and began blowing up their costly coolers, other cooler manufacturers, such as RTIC Coolers pledged their support for the Second Amendment.

YETI replied to the backlash with a statement expressing their commitment to protecting Second Amendment rights. The company also says that the NRA Foundation’s statement claiming that they “no longer wish to be an NRA vendor” is misleading:

Whatever is going on here I hope it can be sorted out so the public can have the facts before they “blow up” a perfectly good $200 plus dollar cooler.

More on NRA Boycotts Via Business Insider:

“Activists supporting and opposing stricter gun regulations are taking sides in America’s latest round of boycotts.

Delta, United Airlines, Hertz, and MetLife are among more than a dozen companies that have cut ties with the NRA in the past week after the school massacre this month in Parkland, Florida. NRA members are offered discounts and other deals as part of their belonging to the gun-rights organization.

In response to companies cutting ties, supporters of the NRA have sprung into action with boycotts of their own.

Delta, United, and Hertz are now the enemy for pro-gun-rights activists, while FedEx has become a new ally.

The divided response is playing out in the Twitter replies and Facebook pages of every company that has ever offered NRA members discounts.

The traditional complaints about poor customer service and delayed flights are completely forgotten in favor of celebration or disgust over gun control.

Roughly half are positive, roughly half are negative — and there is no in-between.

Boycotts and counter-boycotts have become an increasingly common part of the American political narrative in recent years.

From conservatives smashing Keurigs after the company pulled ads from Sean Hannity’s show to liberals ditching Macy’s for selling Ivanka Trump’s fashion brand, political hot spots are increasingly being tied to consumer boycotts.

“Reputation these days is far more visible and important,” John Paluszek, executive producer of corporate responsibility organization Business in Society, told Business Insider.

As e-commerce opens up seemingly infinite options to customers, experts say that corporate values are playing an increasingly large role in customers’ shopping decisions. Tying a brand to certain values and political beliefs is one way to beat out rivals, especially for brands attempting to establish a higher-end image.

As a result, companies are expected to take sides on certain political issues.

The emphasis on companies’ social values comes at a time of intense political polarization. Behavior once seen as apolitical, such as having or cutting advertising on a certain right-wing TV show, is now seen as unacceptable by a huge chunk of the US.

Boycotts typically don’t have a major impact on sales in the short-term. But, they can have a huge impact on how American shoppers think about politics and brands.

Endless boycotts create a cycle of division
Gun control should be something that Americans can agree on. In fact, most of the US does agree.

A Quinnipiac poll released last week found that two-thirds of American voters support stricter gun laws, reaching the highest level in the poll’s history.

But the instinctive counter-boycott led by many on the right has made it seem as though there is no middle ground between people calling for gun-control regulation and those who support gun rights.

The NRA has pushed back against even moderate gun-control regulation, something much of the country agrees with. So, it makes sense that a company would want to cut ties with the NRA, especially since the discount deal is a pretty insignificant part of business.

But, as was the case in past boycott efforts, cutting off discounts has produced a new cycle of backlash. On Monday, Georgia’s Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle threatened to kill any legislation that benefits Delta unless the airline “fully reinstates its relationship with” the NRA.

According to experts, companies need to listen to workers and customers to figure out which choice will best shape their long-term reputation. Most of all, they need to provide a straight-forward and clear explanation to customers to explain their choice.

“You’ve got to explain yourself and you’ve got to do it at the right time,” Paluszek said.

Most companies that have cut ties with the NRA have provided explanations, even if they’re brief. However, FedEx — one of the few companies to continue to offer NRA members discounts — has so far failed to speak publicly about its decision.

It is unlikely that companies that have cut ties with the NRA will see a major sales impact. And, by cutting ties, brands like Delta and Hertz have played a major role in making the ostracization of the NRA a mainstream and dominant stance.

However, the backlash to the backlash shows how boycotts can be pushed to the point of absurdity. One year into the Trump presidency, the expectation of a counter-boycott represents a knee-jerk desire to force companies to support a specific political opinion, instead of looking to points of compromise.”

H/T The Daily Wire

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’



Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.

From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.

His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”

But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund.  In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.

Fox News reports:

“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.

The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”

It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’

Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.

The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”

Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.

The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”

The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The group advocates that –

  1. That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
  2. All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
  3. Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.

Fox News continued:

Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.

“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.

“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.

Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.

Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.

Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?

Continue Reading


Trump Issued Major Warning: ‘We Will Look Into Discriminatory and Illegal Practice’ – It’s On!

Huge problems and everyone needs to know!



President Donald Trump voiced his concerns over “discriminatory and illegal practice” when he posted about the alleged controversy going on with Republicans being censored on Twitter. The tactic is sometimes referred to as “shadow banning” and it seems to be a strategy that social media platforms use to limit the visibility of some people. For example, ever wonder why someone who is genuinely popular might have tons of followers but their posts don’t seem to get many responses? It could be one of several reasons. Either they have fake followers, the post is no good, or they are being censored. In many cases, it’s a form of censorship that’s the obvious result. When a social media user goes from getting a lot of replies and views on their posts, then all of a sudden there’s very little replies and it seems like no one has seen the post – then they were hit with that form of censorship or suppression.

Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been called out for suppressing the content of certain Republican voices or those who support President Donald Trump. Well-known stars like Diamond and Silk have made it very public that they feel targeted for the views and opinions on their pages. That’s just the tip of the iceberg because the problem spans from targeting well-known mainstream people all the way down to the independent publishers. Censorship like this is affecting people’s careers and causing an unbalanced platform in which people with certain views are being limited. It might not be listed as a “ban” but it’s certainly limiting the viewership of certain people. The content that would once appear in people’s feed or timeline now requires a fine-tooth comb to find and it seems like people are realizing this more often and being upset with it.

Trump spoke about it on Twitter and Vice News completed a report on it.

Vice News reported: “Twitter is limiting the visibility of prominent Republicans in search results — a technique known as “shadow banning” — in what it says is a side effect of its attempts to improve the quality of discourse on the platform.

The Republican Party chair Ronna McDaniel, several conservative Republican congressmen, and Donald Trump Jr.’s spokesman no longer appear in the auto-populated drop-down search box on Twitter, VICE News has learned. It’s a shift that diminishes their reach on the platform — and it’s the same one being deployed against prominent racists to limit their visibility. The profiles continue to appear when conducting a full search, but not in the more convenient and visible drop-down bar. (The accounts appear to also populate if you already follow the person.)

Democrats are not being “shadow banned” in the same way, according to a VICE News review. McDaniel’s counterpart, Democratic Party chair Tom Perez, and liberal members of Congress — including Reps. Maxine Waters, Joe Kennedy III, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan — all continue to appear in drop-down search results. Not a single member of the 78-person Progressive Caucus faces the same situation in Twitter’s search.

“The notion that social media companies would suppress certain political points of view should concern every American,” McDaniel told VICE News in a statement. “Twitter owes the public answers to what’s really going on.”

Presented with screenshots of the searches, a Twitter spokesperson told VICE News: “We are aware that some accounts are not automatically populating in our search box and shipping a change to address this.” Asked why only conservative Republicans appear to be affected and not liberal Democrats, the spokesperson wrote: “I’d emphasize that our technology is based on account *behavior* not the content of Tweets.”

Twitter directed VICE News to a May 15 blog post that explained the company’s new approach to combating “troll-like behaviors.” After making changes to its platform, the company said that “[t]he result is that people contributing to the healthy conversation will be more visible in conversations and search.”

Twitter did not respond to a follow-up question.

Twitter’s troll hunt, however, has ensnared some of the most prominent Republicans in the country. Type in the names of McDaniel, conservative members of Congress like Reps. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz, and Trump Jr.’s spokesman Andrew Surabian, for example, and Twitter’s drop-down search bar does not show their profiles. The search menu also does not display the verified profile of Rep. Devin Nunes of California, only his unverified one that he seldom uses to post.

That limits their visibility and the ease of finding their profiles compared to their liberal counterparts.

UPDATE: July 26, 10:00 AM: Twitter appears to have adjusted its platform overnight to no longer limit the visibility of some prominent Republicans in its search results.”

At what point do social media platforms give the control back to the people? Users should not have to worry about their views being censored by the machine.

Censoring any content that is not illegal should not be tolerated by the users.

Continue Reading

Like Us on Facebook



No trending posts found at this time.